[Approved Nov. 1, 2007]

Minutes of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate

October 25, 2007

St. Mary’s 113 B; 12:00 PM

Present: D. Biers (presiding), T. Eggemeier, A. Fist, P. Johnson, R. Kearns, L. Laubach, R. Penno, T. Stevens, R. Wells

J. Farrelly (Faculty Board)

Roll Call:

Nine members of the Committee were present.

Prayer:

The meeting opened with a period of silent meditation.

Approval of Minutes:

October 18, 2007 approved.

Announcements:

The Promotion and Tenure Document was endorsed by the Academic affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees at its meeting last week. It was tabled at the meeting of the full Board because it had not been distributed to all members. Action will be taken on the document at the January meeting. The faculty committee called for in the document may be elected before the January meeting so that it is ready to begin functioning, given that the Board approves the document.

Old Business:

• “Guidelines for the Development of Course-Based Graduate Certificate Programs” was assigned to the Academic policies Committee with the request to act on this document so that it can be considered at the December meeting of the Academic Senate. APCAS is asked to review the document and to address two issues: Does the Committee recommend that the Academic Senate endorse the three types of certificate programs, and if so, will there be a transcripting process in place that follows best practices?
• Standing Committee Reports
• R. Penno reported for the Academic Policies Committee. The Committee met to discuss the proposed Assessment plan. J. Untener attended the meeting and provided explanation as to why the seven objectives from Habits of Inquiry had been adopted for this document. He also indicated that he expects the Academic Senate to vote on this plan. ECAS asks the APCAS to determine whether the Academic Senate is to approve the process or the goals or both.
• D. Biers reported that the Faculty Affairs Committee had met to prepare a presentation for the October 26 meeting of the Academic Senate.
• A. Fist reported that the Student Academic Policies Committee had met to review the draft of the Honor Code as prepared by last year’s standing committee. The will continue discussion about standardization and whether to recommend guidelines or the establishment of a board. It was suggested that they consult with Sr. Smelling. The Committee plans to bring this document to ECAS yet this semester and complete work for action of the Academic Senate by the end of the academic year.

New Business:

• A request has been received to review the Faculty Maternity Policy. This is Document 04-06, approved on October 29, 2004. It is noted that the policy was to be reviewed after two years and that that period has elapsed. It was also noted that there were issues related to summer births and to paternity leave and leave for adoptions that were not addressed in the document. At the time of passage of the document, there was agreement to return to these issues. J. Untener will be asked about the status of a report on the implementation of the policy. The ECAS will determine any further requests for action on this issue.
• At the meeting of the ELC the issue of involving faculty earlier in the budget discussion process was discussed. D. Biers has received an offer from T. Burkhardt to meet with ECAS. He will consult about a possible time. In addition, ECAS needs to consider the Provost suggestion of appointing a small committee to consider how to develop a process that will allow for input from faculty at an earlier point in the process.
• D. Biers reported that B. Conniff had presented a proposal at the College meeting of the Council of Chairpersons and Program Directors that would involve changes the basic skills requirement in English composition. Biers noted that he reminded Conniff that the competencies are a University requirement that is enacted by the Academic Senate. Any changes must go through the Academic Senate and be approved there. In relation to this discussion, the Executive Committee noted that members of the University community need to be better informed about the processes of the Academic Senate. All work for the Senate must be submitted through the Executive Committee.
• D. Bickford may ask for time on the December agenda of the Academic Senate to discuss issues related to Welcome Week-End (previously called Orientation).

Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 1:15 PM.

Respectfully Submitted,

Patricia A. Johnson, Secretary